From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15737 invoked by alias); 29 Sep 2009 23:57:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 15728 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Sep 2009 23:57:59 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-pz0-f189.google.com (HELO mail-pz0-f189.google.com) (209.85.222.189) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:57:55 +0000 Received: by pzk27 with SMTP id 27so3635413pzk.12 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:57:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.3.13 with SMTP id 13mr382419wfc.302.1254268673076; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:57:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20090929212910.GG6362@adacore.com> References: <4AA68C92.7070905@vmware.com> <4ABE5E8D.8080209@vmware.com> <20090928160728.GB9003@adacore.com> <20090929212910.GG6362@adacore.com> From: Hui Zhu Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:57:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFA] let record_resume fail immediately on error To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Michael Snyder , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-09/txt/msg00942.txt.bz2 On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 05:29, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> Sorry I didn't talk it very clear. =A0Let me try it. > > In other words: If an error occurs during recording, somehow > the inferior "runs away", meaning runs until completion? > Do we lose the process record? If the error happen, prec will stop the inferior. But make the inferior is not right. It because I use signal in record_wait. So I remove it now. > > Based on the transcript of the session *with* the patch you propose, > it looks like GDB is now just stuck on that instruction that it does > not know how to record. Is that really progress? The insn nonsupport error is a error that easy to reproduce. I think the current prec will make the inferior exit with other error. Thanks, Hui